DVDActive uses cookies to remember your actions, such as your answer in the poll. Cookies are
also used by third-parties for statistics, social media and advertising. By using this website, it is
assumed that you agree to this.

Forums - Discs & Movies - Saw III

Reply

Message

Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.

Finally got around to watching Saw 3 this evening, was surprised how full the screening was. Wish I had seen Saw 2 before watching it though, I assumed it wouldn't rely so much on the previous movies like most other horror sequels.

Franchise wrote: Don't forget that Fox is distributors of many other horror movies like 28 Days Later (which was quite good), The Omen (sucked), The Alien movies, The Night of the Living Dead remake, and a few others. While I respect O'Reilly, he lead his panelists through the questions to get the answers that he wanted. The legitimacy of that segment is about like me claiming to be the President and everyone here backing me up. Ridiculous.

Don't forget that Fox is distributors of many other horror movies like 28 Days Later (which was quite good), The Omen (sucked), The Alien movies, The Night of the Living Dead remake, and a few others. While I respect O'Reilly, he lead his panelists through the questions to get the answers that he wanted. The legitimacy of that segment is about like me claiming to be the President and everyone here backing me up. Ridiculous.

I'll bet a million dollars that O'Reilly didn't see any of the movies he's talking about. And did it dawn on him for a second that it was Halloween, and perhaps that was why there were so many horror films out?

In the end, this c**p just adds up to more interest in the films, just look at the UK Video Nasties. Those are some of the most sought after films of all time, and at least 70% of them are horrible films.

That show was kind of weird to watch, it lacked focus because there was no one to represent the studios or evil people such as Gabe. I'm pretty sure that columnist made a mistake too, Sony own what used to be Tristar, not Lionsgate.

£ukasz D wrote: Whe human enjoys watching stuf like this (and Saw 2 and most probably 3 is just about it-nothing more) than it is exactly same as if you would enjoy watching film about people being mordered in Concentration Camps during WW2 in the same vivid way as SAW do (luckly ther is no such film).

But you don't watch them, and when you do it's with a closed mind. If it isn't banned in Poland, you should rent and try to watch Cannibal Holocaust some time. I've only made it through the film once, and find most of it revolting, but I have to admit that it's masterfully made, and has a real power. It's not entertaining, and it's very exploitative, but it's art. The only thing about I cannot abide by is the on screen slaughter of live animals. I understand that people actually ate them, but it does seem unnessisarily cruel, though it does do something to cloud the mind of the veiwer into beleiving that perhaps the actors have died too.

As a film lover I feel I can respect that which revolts me as much as that which enthralls me. I see simular creative power in children's cartoons and action films when done right. A set piece is a set piece, and someone who says they love film should be able to appriciate craft in all areas, from operatic drama, to breathtaking suspense, to the most unbearable violence. So long as I know it isn't real, and can aknowledge the craft involved I see no problem in appriciating gore. Sometimes it's spectical alone, sometimes it's deeper. When it's a film is bad, it's bad, but films should be judge on their intentions rather than the critic's moral borameter.

You can't tell someone you think they are mentally ill and think you aren't offending them or judging. That's just dumb. If film is truly your passion than you need to open your mind and absorb as much film as possible, not just "safe" films. Again, forget about V and Saw, ackowledge the rest of my comments, don't harp on two examples, it makes for a weak and repetative arguement.

First of all..sorry if i've offended you or any one here..that was not my intention..(as you may see in my first post, I didn't sayed people who enjoy it are emotionaly il..i just asked a question what do you think about this people).

and to answer to your last post Gabe..i do not state any opinions about what man are u, as you sayed I don't know u, and it was not my intention to judge what kind of man are u..i was just expresing my thoughts.

and, you wrote "Perhaps film is only an entertainment form for you, and that's fine, but you have to appriciate the fact that some of us appriciate the artistic side, whether it be ironic or intentional. "- you are wrong Gabe, movies are for me mauch much more than just pure entertainment. They are my passion, my hobby and the artistic side, that you mentioned, is the most importnat thing in them (and sorry but I can't see any artism in Saw). I've made my own Polish DVD site (www.projektdvd.pl) just form the love to cinema...not from the love of fun that movies give. And I appriciate all opinions, those which agree with mine, and those which do not. P.S. If you put Saw and V for Vendetta in the same category , based on the impresion that V is also abut violence, than I strongly belivee you are mistaken.

£ukasz D wrote: is V for Vendetta the movie onlu about violence ????? (like Saw) is itonly about mordering peple, only about how much blood can we spill more ????????

and you mentioned something , that i've no knowladge in psychology....right, I have no..but show me psychologist who'll say that this kind of movies are great and its ok to enjoy them .

You're pretty good about cherry picking my statements. Answer all my accusations or answer none of them. My point about V for Vendetta was the fact that you got physical joy out of watching V bloodily murder people in slow-bloody-motion. And how is Sin City not a film about violence? Or Alien for that matter? Or The Terminator? Or any number of popular and classic films that you own (though I notice you've stopped linking your collection recently).

There has never been conclusive proof made that violent entertainment brings about violent personalities. Ever. If anything, a link has been made between children being desensitized by sanitized violence like that found in The Matrix or Commando. Gore films tend to disgust and repulse the viewer, but when the violence is relatively bloodless or unrelaistic it entices.

You can't think you know anything about me based soley on the fact that I watch gory films. You can probably get a lot of who I am from reading my reviews, but unless you're willing to think about the filmgoing experience from another person's point of view, you aren't going to get anything out of film critisism. Perhaps film is only an entertainment form for you, and that's fine, but you have to appriciate the fact that some of us appriciate the artistic side, whether it be ironic or intentional.

Well I'm totally screwed then because I like the cleverness of the trap designs in these films and I also like some of Marilyn Manson's songs...

Puhlease..!! Liking either of these things doesn't make me into a monster and I have no interest in seeing actual harm happening to real people in any way shape or form ever. I like horror movies but would never even consider watching a genuine snuff movie - they are two totally different things!!!

It's the people that can't tell the difference or compare the two to each other that need watching very closely...

Show me an adult with a good head on his shoulders that actually cares what a psychologist says. Personally, I love horror movies and it doesn't make me some kind of monster. My common sense says that violence is wrong. Who am I hurting by enjoying a movie? No one to my knowledge. People can enjoy any movie they want and I thoroughly enjoy all kinds of flicks myself.

SAW 4 is already announced by LionsGate Saw Cuts It at B.O. On the weekend before Halloween, nothing can beat a fright flick, even if it's the sequel to a sequel. The Saw empire rocked the box office again this year with a $34.3 million take, outdoing the two earlier versions and making it the only newbie in the top 10. Meanwhile, The Departed held on to the No. 2 spot with $9.8 million, bringing its total to $91 million and making it Martin Scorsese's biggest moneymaker ever. Last week's leader, The Prestige, dropped to No. 3, and Clint Eastwood's Flags of Our Fathers expanded into 314 additional locations to bring in $6.4 million, on par with Eastwood's recent films Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby. Running With Scissors also expanded, bringing it to the bottom rung of the top 10 with $2.6 million. And it's no surprise that this morning, Lions Gate announced Saw IV for Halloween 2007.

Quote: I just got back from Saw 3! (BTW I liked SAW 2) It was stupid! I have no plans to see anymore "SAW" movies!

Spoiler They didn't really leave any room for sequels...

Quote: Whe human enjoys watching stuf like this (and Saw 2 and most probably 3 is just about it-nothing more) than it is exactly same as if you would enjoy watching film about people being mordered in Concentration Camps during WW2 in the same vivid way as SAW do (luckly ther is no such film).

I don't think you can really compare the two. One is based on actual events, the other is a work of fiction. I think you need to back off with the sanctimonious stuff. If you don't like gory/violent films, that's your call, but don't go bad-mouthing people who do.

£ukasz, you are such a liar. What about Sin City, or Alien, or even V for Vendetta, or did you close your eyes when V murdered all those innocent cops in slow motion with blood spraying all over the place. It's good to think before you speak.

I haven't even seen Saw 2 or 3, and don't care to, but I'm not going to call someone mentally ill for enjoying it. It's judgemental, childish, ignorant, idiodic, and sad. You can think how ever you want, but don't tell me about a free world where people judge others so closely based on the movies they watch, for entertainment or artistic purposes.

And there are pleanty of exploitation films that reinact concentration camp violence, SS and Japanese, and do you know what? They were just bad movies, and no one was hurt by them.

I definitely agree. I go into a movie like this. I turn off my mind. Any cool things are bonuses. I've watched quite a few lame horror movies that I wish I never watched, but most often, I have a good time.

Pointless expression of violence? Saw III was none of that. Without ruining a movie that revolves around traps like Saw does, it had a fairly good emotional bond for the main character. While I love horror movies, I'm also a father. When I see my child, my heart melts and all my day's frustrations go away. I'm not a monster by any means because of the movies that I watch.

If you watch drama movies, does that make you a pansy? Most likely not. I don't like being stereotyped for the movies I like or the music I listen to and take offense at the notion that people will call me emotionally corrupt from knowing I take joy in horror movies. Didn't facism start this way?

what I think is that when people enjoy watching violence, blood, gore and stuff that is totaly unnatural to humanity..than that is not something normal to say it in the most calm way.

I think that if you enjoy watching movies like that, it means you enjoy gore, spiling blodd, couse thath is all that this movie series has to offer.

Whe human enjoys watching stuf like this (and Saw 2 and most probably 3 is just about it-nothing more) than it is exactly same as if you would enjoy watching film about people being mordered in Concentration Camps during WW2 in the same vivid way as SAW do (luckly ther is no such film).

But once again, it's my opinion...i think that way, and as far as I know we live in a free world, where I can have my own thoughts weter you like it or not.

P.S. and to yur information, I have to disapoint u- but no, I do not like any movies that main plot is pointles expression of violence- in any kind of way.

How am I suppose to not be offended by somebody without any knowledge of psychology, who's never met me tells me he thinks there's something emotionally wrong with me?

Fine, no offense, but I think you're an idiot who likes pleanty of violent films, but likes life on his high horse too much to admit that those violent films are just as emotionally affecting as the ones I watch.

Gabe Powers wrote: I really, really resent your implication that there's something emotionally wrong with me £ukasz. It's entirely baseless, and ignorant. if seeing blood, violence, and stupid pointles gore is giveing you fan and makes you entertaint..than yes..i do think there is something emotionally wrong with u... but that is just my opinion..no offence man..that is just the way I think.

£ukasz D wrote: tell me pleas..what is the reason to make such movies ???????Well, Hollywood (and everyone else in the world)live off of something called money. It pays for their food, their houses, and their cars.

Nothing wrong with watching a gory film - doesn't turn stable people into mass murderers or anything. Saw III isn't terrible, but neither is it particularly memorable for anything other than the gore. I thought it was better than the second one, but if I didn't have an unlimited cinema pass I'd never have gone to see it.

tell me pleas..what is the reason to make such movies ??????? Movies, that the only aspect is bloooooooooooooooooooooooood.

Saw1 was good thriller based on good psychological plot, not on buckets of blood spiled all over the screen. Saw2 (btw. worst film of last year) was just plain stupid blood bath..nothing more.....and judging by the trailers and Chris words..Saw3 will be the same if not worse.

P.S. and pleas tell me, don't you think that it is not normal that people love to see this kind of films, love to see blood, death, violence..and that is what realy exites them ??